In this case the Appellate Division applied the lesson set out in the Court of Appeals' decision in Pell v
Board of Educucation of Union Free School Dist. No. 1 of Towns of Scarsdale and
Mamaroneck, 34 NY2d 222, typically referred to as the Pell Doctrine: the disciplinary penalty imposed on a individual found guilty of disciplinary charges must be proportionate to the offense.
The School Board [Board] filed disciplinary charges against one of its employees, a custodial worker, pursuant to §75 of the Civil Service Law alleging incompetence and misconduct. The hearing officer found the employee [Petitioner] guilty of incompetence, insubordination, and misconduct and recommended that the Petitioner be terminated from his position. The Board accepted the hearing officer's findings and recommendation and terminated Petitioner.
Petitioner appealed and the Appellate Divisions, noted that its review of an administrative determination in an employee disciplinary proceeding made after a hearing pursuant to §75 of the Civil Service Law is limited to considering whether the Board's determination "was supported by substantial evidence."*
The Appellate Division concluded that there was substantial evidence in the record supporting the determination that the Petitioner was guilty of incompetence, insubordination, and misconduct. The court's decision reports that "The record indicates, inter alia, that [Petitioner] discovered a knife and pepper spray under a radiator and left them there for approximately three hours knowing that there were students and other staff in the building, and that the [Petitioner] gave two students $25 each after betting that one of the students would win in a basketball game against the other."
Citing Branam v Simons, 300 AD2d 973, the court said that although "a finding of incompetence ... only requires evidence of some dereliction or neglect of duty," in light of all the circumstances, including the Petitioner's length of service and lack of a prior disciplinary record, "the penalty of termination was so disproportionate to the offense as to be shocking to one's sense of fairness."**.
Accordingly, the Appellate Division granted Petitioner's appeal "to the extent that so much of the determination as terminated the petitioner's employment is annulled" and remanded the matter to the Board "for the imposition of a lesser penalty."
* The court opined that "Substantial evidence has been defined
as such relevant proof as a reasonable mind may accept as adequate to support a
conclusion or ultimate fact."
** Here the Appellate Division refers to the decision of the Court of Appeals in Pell v
Board of Educ. of Union Free School Dist. No. 1 of Towns of Scarsdale and
Mamaroneck, 34 NY2d 222.
Click HERE to access the Appellate Division's decision posted on the Internet.